Freethought Nation

77 thoughts on “Defining the concept of God as energy”

1. Thanks for another terrific contribution to Freethought Nation, Murali!

   I enjoyed your musings very much, and I like the idea of redefining “God” in such a manner.

   This idea reminds me of the famous quote by renowned astronomer Dr. Carl Sagan ([url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan#Personal_life_and_beliefs[/url]):

   [quote]The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying… it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity.[/quote]
   Thus, Sagan concluded logically that, if we redefine God as the physical laws of the cosmos, we can agree that such a “god” does indeed exist.

   In this way, our dilemma is reconciled, but Sagan also points out that this god, devoid of personality and lacking in anthropomorphism, does not satisfy the emotional needs of many human beings.

   Consider, however, that if we were in an ideal environment, whereby people were not [i]preying [/i]upon each other, there would be no real emotional need for [i]prayer [/i]to such an anthropomorphic, personal God.

   If human beings were raised with this deeper understanding of the universe, and not abused by the typical religious doctrine that separates out the divine from the rest of creation and belittles the latter, including and especially humanity, we would have a much healthier world.

   1. Sagan is Wrong
      God is not only energy; God is also Consciousness. Everything is made of that Consciousness. There is nothing that is not that Consciousness. To assume that this world, with all its beauty; and life itself, with all its variety; and the phenomenon of love, could have been created by accident, without a conscious Will driving it, is the ultimate display of irrationality. But forget the Vedas; all you have to know from them is “tat tvam asi.” Study Kashmir Shavism, which anticipates the latest insights of quantum mechanics. And there IS a God worth worshiping: The Self of All.

      1. Thank you.

         Obviously, I disagree that Sagan is wrong. What you have conveyed is not at odds with what he has said, except that it seems you are relying on a euphoric interpretation of reality as proof that “God” is a personified entity.

         There is also [i]unconsciousness [/i]in the cosmos – is that not also “God,” if God is “all?”

         Euphoria is not evidence of anything but the fact that humans have emotions.

         In the meantime, Sagan is correct in what he has stated, which is not the end-all of this discussion, needless to say.

         1. Correction: Sagan’s implication is wrong
            I’m all for inter-disciplinary scholarship, but I really must question how an astronomer can be relied upon for expertise about the subject of God, especially when so many quantum physicists have weighed in on the matter so positively — not to mention thousands of years of philosophers, even up to the late, great Charles Hartshorne, with his process theology and panentheism. I suggest that Sagan was not able to see God through a telescope because he was looking in the wrong direction.

            And I must say, Ms. Murdock, that I’m appalled that you could manage to read “euphoria” and personification into my comments on consciousness, which mostly simply quote or paraphrase scripture that has been honored and commented upon by scholars and REAL — not self-styled — acharyas for millennia, an interpretation that must make me seriously question your readings of the many texts that you cite in your wonderful books.

            Yes, the ancient rishis of south Asia knew about the unconscious — Sanskrit “achetana” — but to imply that unconsciousness is a thing in the sense of existing as such “in the cosmos” — as opposed to merely being a term to describe a mental concept — is like saying that there exists such a thing as “nothing,” which must surely be some kind of a fallacy, pace Heidegger.

            I could go on with this, but I’d prefer to end with a quote from another late great “renowned” astronomer of the inner universe, Carl Jung. When Jung was asked whether he believed in God he replied, “I know. I don’t have to believe; I know.”

            1. So, your response is moral outrage and ad homs insulting my intelligence and education?

               My comments were very mild. No need to become freaked out and unglued simply by having a discussion about cosmic concepts. Where’s the love and meditation?

               There is nothing “appalling” about what I’ve said above. Nor is the regurgitation of Hindu philosophy the mark of a “real acharya,” whatever fantasy that may be.

               Hindu fanaticism aside, Carl Sagan remains substantially correct. The quality of personification exists in the cosmos, but that does not mean there is an anthromorphized giant God somewhere “out there” separate and apart from humanity and the rest of creation.

            2. With great respect and love for a fine scholar, acharya or not, thanks for a stimulating exchange:

               I have made no comments about your intelligence (which I regard highly; or education, which I have looked into and consider to be exceedingly thorough on the subjects in question). What I question is your bizarre interpretation of my remarks. Instead of addressing my actual comments you’re calling me freaked out, unglued, having fantasies and being a fanatic. And you accuse me of ad hom arguments and being insulting?

               As for the subject of “proof” (your term, by which I assume you mean “scientific” proof, which is not the only kind of proof) I would refer anyone who’s interested in this subject to check out Charles Hartshorne’s analysis in terms of modal logic of Anselm’s Argument, which offers logical proof that if the idea of God makes any sense at all, God exists necessarily.

               As for Sagan and other scientists of his (arguably fanatical scientific) mindset, I’ll finally defer here to Heraclitus (attributed): “Much learning does not gain understanding.”

               And the Shiva Sutra: “Knowledge is bondage.”

         2. Science as ‘temporarily correct’
            It is a bad notion many people have that ‘scientists are always right’ or that they don’t have agendas every bit as bad as those normally associated with religions.

            Carl Sagan is a good example. For the years that Carl Sagan was active, he was basing his statements on what was ‘cutting edge’ scientific theory and/or fact (but theory, mostly). Since the 70s, physics has moved on because what they were seeking to confirm (the 6 lepton; 6 quark family of particles) proved ‘disadvantageous’ to their theories.

            In particular there were (are) problems with the Top Quark (remember that one?). Fermilab triumphed ‘they had found it’…then they retracted it….then they (sort of) triumphed it again. It was highly advantageous that they had ‘indeed’ found it at a time they were putting in for more government funding. After this was done, we heard no more about the Top Quark and 6 lepton and 6 quark particle model. Suddenly we (the public) were treated to “super-string super-symmetry” theories. Which Stephen Hawking (he has taken Sagan’s place) is now pontificating as ‘all but proven’.

            The problem with the top quark, which made those proponents fold their tents and steal softly into the night was the mass of the target was way off from theoretically predicted mass (about 60 times as large). The other thing to mention here is, scientists were describing this as an entity (having location, form and mass). In reality, the top quark, in good math probably ‘can’t exist’ and what they were describing as an [i]entity[/i] was, in fact, an ‘[i]event[/i]’. Let me make an illustration of what happened in the top quark finding.

            IF one fires two super magnets at each other so their [i]like poles[/i] hit and then one records in minute detail the energies displayed, for a while you record the velocities of the two objects. This is then changed as the two collide and then cancel each other’s original movement out. At some point, the native magnetism rises up again and the two particles repel each other. There will be a point, a milli-fraction of a second where all the energies have cancelled each other out. If you read this ‘event’ as if it is a new particle, then you are misreading the data. You are claiming an “event is an entity”. This is basically what went on with the Top Quark. Since it didn’t tally with the pre-existing theories…it was inconvenient and so it was quietly deposited in the ‘circular file’ of physics. Rather than claim ‘we were wrong’, they simply said nothing (too embarrassing).

            Now we have Super-String Super-Symmetry theory that 10 years or more ago was triumphed as only need a bit of tweaking to get the two theories to provide ‘[b]the Theory of Everything[/b]’. What the public has not been privy to here is a kind of ‘crank physics’ has taken hold to try and prove it correct. By this I mean, not to cast aspersions on the intelligence of those working the theories, but the classical ‘crank’ symptoms have appeared that normally appear in impossible math proofs, like ‘squaring the circle’. Often highly intelligent people engage in constructing crank proofs.

            What happens is this, when you prove one part is ‘what you say it is’, this ‘unproves or makes ambiguous some other part of the problem’. If you prove THAT part is, ‘what you say it is, THAT process makes ambiguous the other part you just proved by another method. It is like trying to nail down a warped board in the floor. Pound one nail down, and the other pops up. That is crank mathematics (or physics). This is EXACTLY the problem with Super-String Super-Symmetry, although you will never be told this.

            So scientists are often just as guilty of protecting their religion as are bishops. When a scientist then posits the nature of a Creator based on his model of science, he is has no better clue than does the dedicated religious person. Scientists, being absolutely dedicated to ‘measuring things’, cannot get it in their heads that there can exist some real thing which they cannot measure.

            Personally, I like mathematics and there are problems here, too. The way modern society understands mathematics is fundamentally wrong and this, not surprisingly, is what is really at the bottom of problems in physics. All their theoretics are written in this fundamentally skewed mathematics and it sends them up a dirt path every time. But trusting the math, they don’t know there is error in it, so they are confused by the results they are getting.

            But it is proper mathematics that ultimately provides the answer of the nature of a ‘Supreme Being’. Form comes from Formlessness. Formlessness is not ‘nothing’. It is the primogenitor of all subsequent forms. Forms are bound by extremes and limited. Because of these limitations, they have locations in space and form can be measured by a smaller form (unit of measure). This measurement, however, is utterly impossible in the FORMLESS because there is, among other problems, A) no credible unit of measure which can be used and B ) no place to start or stop (location).

            In form, you can easily identify that there is ‘formlessness’ as the ‘absolute center’ of any form. The problem is, you can’t measure it. As soon as you try, the formless center is ‘smaller than your unit’. Think of a circle and its center point…what is the size of the center point? It has no size. but does it have form and can this be proven? Yes it does have form and yes it is proven. The more accurately the center of a circular object is located, the higher the performance of that object. Balance is the art of ‘finding the center of some form’. But this center is formless and cannot be absolutely measured.

            The same goes for the FORMLESSNESS from which Form is derived. The funny thing about all this is, Awareness is the one thing we know that can be described coherently as being formless. And this is where the notion of a Supreme Being comes from as the Perfect Formless Awareness from which all Form is derived. Energy, being measured routinely, is merely another form.

            Finally, The very problem with Super-Symmetry is that they are trying to apply the measurement of form to the Formless and that is why they are engaged in crank mathematics. They are trying to measure the absolute center of form…..and it simply can’t be done. It is crank mathematics at its most basic application.

   2. I couldn’t agree with you more. Especially with your last couple of thoughts regarding the difference in the possible outcomes of human beings raised to understand science & the universe instead of the varying types of religious beliefs there are on this planet. Thank you for sharing.

2. No idea about the intention of the writer!
   Looks like a confused mind. All ATHEIST’s writes these crap. One must go through Vedas and understand the real sense of GOD. So,if one while talking all about crap and makes no mention of vedas, it is a crap talk. So chill out dude.

   1. In your haste to insult Mr. Chemuturi (and atheists), you appear not to have read the article.

      Why would this short article mention the Vedas? And how do you know that this [i]Indian/Hindu[/i] writer has not read the Vedas?

      Frankly, you come across as an irrational and unreasonable religious fanatic.

      As such, it would be very helpful to humanity if [i]you [/i]would “chill out dude [sic],” as we are in no need of more religious fanatics.

3. What science is quickly revealing in this New Age is that “everything is energy” which is vibrating at a frequency specific to each individual or thing in the Universe — it is this frequency that defines who are what we are. Yet, it can also be said that we each create our own special frequency by the way we think.

   I would like to refer members of this discussion to two books which provide a little more light on this subject: 1) Infininte Mind – Sciience of the Human Vibrations of Consciousness, written by Valerie V. Hunt, PhD, PhD with advanced degrees in both psychology and physiological science from Columbia University. Dr. Hunt was the first to discover vibration patterns during pain, disease, illness and in emotional/spiritual states. She was also the first to discover evidence of individualized field patterns and subtle energetic field happenings between people and within groups. The author has also made major discovery in the vibrant electromagnetic radiation field as it changes during human interaction and with environmental conditions. Simple research graphics contained within the book show the correlation of field waves and auric colors and the field coherency and anti-coherency in health and disease. Another major discovery of Hunt’s is of the “chaos” pattern, the first ever discovered in biological systems. This discovery has profound implications for healing with the ability to bring a coherence pattern back into the system using different modalities that have long been known to the Chinese, e.g., meditation, acupuncture, qigong, and tai chi.

   More on this in a later message.

4. Consciousness ..
   Is energy too, drop that into reality if you THINK you can. – peace

5. I find this line of thought exciting!
   I believe we need a broader definition of religion than what is generally accepted today, especially here in the Western world. I am quite pantheistic in my outlook and so really enjoyed this article.

6. A continuation of the message posted prior to this by me.

   The 2nd book that is quite informative on this is “The Biology of Belief – The Science of How Thoughts Control Life” written by internationally – recognized cell biologist, Dr. Bruce H. Lipton. A former stem cell biologist, Dr. Lipton was awarded the GOI Peace Award in 2009 for recognition of his work in the field of “epigenetics” which means “above the gene.” What science is recognizing today is that our genes do not determine who we are — what does is our perception of our environment. And, our perception is largely determined by the past experiences of our lives. And this experience could be derived not from this lifetime but from a past lifetime as demonstrated by what is referred to as “past life regression” where an individual is able to go back into their past life/lives and recall events that happened there. And trauma that happened in the past many times causes us to behave in response to an event that has long been forgotten by the conscious mind, but is embedded in teh sub-conscious (autonomous) mind and controls our behavior.

   Anyway, with regard to the subject of “energy” we are all composed of electrical energy fields as recorded by Robert O. Becker, M.D., et al, in the book: “The Body Electric – Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life.” This book is very well written and informative with regard to the relationship of electromagnetism and electricity to basic life processes. Once understanding this, i now will go back to Bruce Lipton and his research — what Bruce reveals that is important to this discussion is that an egg or a seed at the moment of conception, the new entity is immediately surrounded by the electromagnetic energy field that underlies all of life. And this field remains surrounding the mind/body field of the individual through out life until death and appears as a sort of “template” that the new human grows into as it matures both mentally and physically. This field is often referred to by psychologists as “the greater self” or “the full potential self” as the “spirit” of who we really are is pulled always forward by our potential.

   This “electromagnetic field” operates on the principles of “the law of attraction” or what is also referred to as “karma” and brings to oneself that which one focuses on. Dr Larry Dossey, M.D. touches on this in his book: “Be Careful What You Pray For, You May Just Get It.” And, in many ways it does seem that one has a “personal God” to which may pray and sooner or later get what one asks for, but in reality, it is the electromagnetic field that surrounds you that brings forth that which you pray for.

   Yet, there are some who have tried to give this energy field a human face and call it by the name of both Jesus and God. More can be learnt about this by going back to the time of Pope Constantine (formerly Emperor Constantine) and learning more about Mythraism and how and why parts of this pagan religion were incorporated into and formed the basis for what we know today as “the Holy Roman Catholic Church.” To learn the truth, one must go back to the time of the Council of Nicea and understand why Pope Constantine removed 22 books from the Old Testament into and formed what he and others wanted the new world to believe.

   And, i certainly recommend the writings of Acharya as a way of finding the path to truth. I also recommend reading “Man Made God” by Barbarba G. Walker. It is time to set the story straight.

7. God? Energy? What’s in a word?
   Seriously, I really mean that. What’s in a word? Having read the opinions of many famous scientists on this subject, I know that many, including the renowned stem cell pioneer Robert Lanza uses the term “Biocentrism” when discussing his personal belief system. Why is the concept of a creator/creation energy so vilified? Like Lanza, I also believe that evolution (a process that cannot exclude creation) is the sole purpose of energy in the cosmos, which as any physicist worth their phd can tell you is not made up of solid matter! Stone age religions aside, one does not necessarily believe that God is a white haired old man with a flowing beard, sitting in the clouds just because one believes in an intelligent creation energy. In fact many atheistic scientists guard outdated information as though it were a religion. Just look how they almost crucified Rupert Sheldrake for his “scientific opinions”. Richard Dawkins might convince more people if he were to come up with a few plausible answers of his own (based on true scientific research) rather than resort to denegrating the work of more notable and better educated peers.
   It vexes me sorely that inflated academic egos still maintain such a non scientific refusal to discuss anything even remotely outside of their own limited understanding. Throwing insults like stones lacks maturity and reeks of “caveman” behaviour.
   One catches more bees with just one spoonful of honey, than with a whole jar full of vinegar.
   If only it were that simple

8. Why ‘God as energy’?
   Actually, I understand why Mr. Chemuturi would suggest god as energy. This is the view that would be adapted from someone with an interest in what Western (international) science would provide. But there IS another one, which mathematics provides, which I think is actually superior to the one he espouses, but has the same sort of non-religious connotations. It is that the Creator is Awareness.

   This is why I say this. All form is mathematically defined as ‘that which is bound by extremes. These extremes are always in pairs and ALWAYS opposites, (i.e. start stop, left right, top bottom). As a fast aside, yes I know some will say ‘lines have no beginning or end’.

   This idea is, actually, geometrically false. It is based in a desire to make numbers and geometric form calibrate in a ‘one to one’ relation. A number line is a system of unit measures in similar sequence and this mimics a straight line. The problem is, Geometrically, ALL linear constructions are ‘interior ONLY to some circle’, (Mohr, Mascheroni, Steiner and Poncelet). What we really have, modernly, is a NATURAL math system (Geometry) and an ARTICFICIAL one (number theory). It is the artificial one that science uses all the time, because it is core to science to ‘measure things’. The problem is, geometrically, you can’t measure that which has no form. Science and even many mathematicians forget this or simply are not clear on the terms of these two main aspects of mathematics.

   To continue on with form. All form is between two extremes which are always in pairs and opposite each other. You cannot have ‘one extreme’ and not the other. You can’t have a ‘start’ and no ‘stop’ any more than you can have a ‘left’ without a ‘right’. When you have NO EXTREMES, you have FORMLESSNESS. Formlessness is not ‘nothing’ it is ‘that from which all form is derived’. It is simply measureless by any unit of measure (minimal form) which created forms can come up with.

   The remarkable thing is this; One cannot think of one thing that can describe formlessness other than – awareness. Awareness is the only thing that can easily be imagined as having no form. It makes sense mathematically as well. Mathematics is the most challenging study that the intellect can take on. And yet, the Universe is seen at all places and time to be following these same principals of mathematics. You can’t have the most challenging intellectual study (clearly an act of awareness) rise ‘from nothing at all’. The source of mathematics has to be in a FORMLESS AWARENESS. And then – everything else in form follows from that source.

   A Formless Awareness, however, is NOT the vision that religions dictate. Religions all dictate a god that has form (extremes). It follows from this that each and every religion of man is guilty of ‘blasphemy’ because they are putting a created god in place of Formless Awareness. Only the very earliest of Gnostics (a generic name here) had it right in calling their concept of Deity ‘The Unknown God’.

   Bottom line, it is not necessary or even desirable to try and push a Creator of All as some kind of energy, because energy, itself is a form and thus created. Only Formless Awareness survives the removal of extremes and thus Awareness is the only thing we can say for sure about a Creator of All.

9. No person should go to jail for violating religiou
   AN ATHEIST EGYPTIAN MAN, BENBAZ, A FREETHINKER IS IN A KUWAIT JAIL FOR “BLASPHEMY” BECAUSE THE JUDGE’S RELIGION TELLS HIM GOD EXISTS.

   Growing up believing in God I never question the existence of a god my first 50 years of my life. You must study to be free of satanic influences.

   People never stop to think they know nothing to free them from bondage to deception, fraud, trickery and so on.

   The false beliefs and deceptions that Christianity is built on in the literary invention of a character found only in written material about the non-historical Jesus Christ is easy to prove since no historical Jesus ever lived.

   The fictional gospel stories are not about any one. Most all if not all, gospel stories were based on pagan fiction going back a thousand years.

   Jesus was never human or divine (a god) but in discovering Jesus is a fake, it only makes sense that God was created by human imagination through a series of lies, misconceptions and deception.

   Now the above is the stark naked truth I believe as absolute. Having deceived officials to put this Kuwait man, a freethinker in jail for believing truth while the official is madly deceived, and wrong, scares me to death.

   Governments that employ religious beliefs to decide jai terms and all religious beliefs originally were built on fiction. This means this Kuwait man is wasting away his precious life in prison for no reason in the real world.

   This is a huge tragedy free societies should devote time and energy to wake up officials in theocracy governments to guard against this horrible injustice.

   Michael R Shearer, Tualatin, Oregon, USA

   1. Now you know WHY governments sponsor religions
      Now you know WHY governments sponsor religions. The religion puts a ‘secret policeman (god) inside every citizen and makes them self monitor their behavior in a way that assists the state to rule over them.

10. Insomnia/Awareness
    Nope, definitely not going to be able to sleep tonight…

11. Thought/Consciousness as energy
    If someday we were able to take a “snapshot” of the cascades of chemical and electrical energy in our brain (plus track all internal and external energies that made us arrive at that very moment), we could assume that consciousness is energy itself. Our metaphors to explain that nature perhaps will lead to newer labels but it surely must be energy.

12. This isn’t an atheist post, it’s religious apolog
    This article is just another attempt to retain the archaic, superstitious notion of “God” within a scientific belief system. I keep seeing this happen – it becomes increasingly obvious to the scientifically educated theist that the universe looks exactly like a godless universe would look, and so they try to redefine god so they can keep hold of it.

    “Now what is wrong in calling the energy as God?”

    “Energy” is a tightly-defined scientific concept. “God” is a theological concept. The word is also very vague and has a huge amount of baggage along with it. The two concepts belong to completely different models of the world, and is not simply a matter of taxonomy as you assert. That’s what’s wrong with it.

    ” How about luck? Some people garner better luck than the others. Atheists say that the people who put in better efforts garner better luck. Positive attitude begets luck and negative attitude begets ill luck.”

    No, as an atheist I deny the notion of “luck”. I cannot perfectly predict the outcome of my actions, and I can engage in behaviours that will probably increase my chance of success. There is no luck, however.

    “What we really need to convert the energy of bad luck into that energy of good luck – right?”

    This statement is simply New Age fuzzy-headed rubbish unworthy even of rebuttal.

    This article is just pseudo-scientific religious apologetics and really unworthy of this site. I’m very disappointed.

    1. Murali Chemuturi is a very nice Hindu man who has nothing to do with the “New Age” or any other of the disparagement that you are going on about here.

       I disagree with your tenor and certain contentions, as should be obvious from my comments above. Most of what Murali has said here is little different from the statements of the late great Dr. Carl Sagan.

       In the meantime, billions of people globally will continue to want to believe in a god of some sort or another, despite the angry ranting of atheists – or even [i]because [/i]of it – so Sagan had the intelligence to see that redefining “God,” as Murali has also done here, is a way of creating greater understanding, not only between peoples but also of the human mind.

       Such endeavors are far more constructive than making false assumptions about others whose minds may work differently. One may make a logical objection to the discussion of “luck,” of course, which gives me pause as well but which one might recognize as an extension of Hindu/Indian thought processes. Thus, one’s objections need not be in such an arrogant and condescending fashion:

       “This statement is simply New Age fuzzy-headed rubbish unworthy even of rebuttal.”

       Out of respect, how about not assuming the worst of others and basically accusing them of being stupid? Who was asking you for a “rebuttal?” Murali has made it obvious that he has been speaking to atheists in a civil fashion and incorporating their views into his own, so why the hostility, as if you are so superior in your own thinking?

       Perhaps the discussion about “luck” would be better worded using “chance,” as in: “If one works harder, one increases one’s chances of success.” Then again, these two words “luck” and “chance” are at times interchangeable:

       [quote]chance ([url]http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chance?s=t[/url])

       1. the absence of any cause of events that can be predicted, understood, or controlled: often personified or treated as a positive agency: Chance governs all.
       2. luck or fortune: a game of chance. [/quote]
       Hopefully, others reading this post and these comments will see the difference in what my friends and I here at Freethought Nation are espousing. I do not hate all religion or the concept of God, and whether or not one wishes to think atheistically or theistically at any given moment is entirely up to the individual, as I am not interested in mind control, a la “1984.” I’m disappointed that any of my readers would be.

       Cheers.

    2. “This statement is simply New Age fuzzy-headed rubbish unworthy even of rebuttal.
       This article is just pseudo-scientific religious apologetics and really unworthy of this site. I’m very disappointed.”

       It’s always a sad thing to read bias rants against free thinkers. What is wrong with one using his/her common sense in conversation? (“:sad:”)

       Most ranters are only repeating various forms of religious brainwashing and mind control picked up along their way.

       We certainly don’t need mind police going around ranting against a person’s free speech and associations.(“:cheer:”)

       1. I know, right? This atheist guy sounds like the anti-atheist fanatic talking about the Vedas in the other comment above. 😡

    3. Energy is tightly defined?
       Hi Anonymous

       You said that “Energy is tightly defined scientific concept. I delayed my response so that I can check my understanding that energy is not so tightly defined. Here are some definitions –

       1. Merriam Webster’s Dictionary – “a fundamental entity of nature that is transferred between parts of a system in the production of physical change within the system and usually regarded as the capacity for doing work”

       2. Wikipedia – The question “what is energy?” is difficult to answer in a simple, intuitive way, although energy can be rigorously defined in theoretical physics. In the words of Richard Feynman, “It is important to realize that i[b]n physics today, we have no knowledge what energy is[/b]. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount.

       3. Energy is defined as the ability or the capacity to do work

       4. In the Physics forums – http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=592 – on the definition of energy, there is no tightly defined definition.

       5 Energy is the capacity of a physical system to perform work. – about.com on physics

       One poster questioned this definition thus, “What gives energy to get the work done?”

       The fact, as I see it is that energy is as fuzzily defined as God is.

       If you have a tight definition of energy, I request you to post it so that I and perhaps others learn from you.

       Best wishes
       Murali Chemuturi

13. Deus sive energeia
    Good article. It reminds me of the ideas of the famous atheist Jewish philosopher and lens grinder Benedict Spinoza, who held that God is just another name for nature, and that everything that exists in Nature (i.e., everything in the Universe) is one Reality and there is only one set of rules governing the whole of the reality which surrounds us and of which we are part. Spinoza viewed God and Nature as two names for the same reality.

    Nature is just another name for matter, and matter is another name for energy, operating through physical causality, or karma.

    We can relate these physical concepts to our metaphysical idea of God by recognising that in a relatively closed local system, such as our solar system, energy can serve to temporarily reverse the process of entropy, the trend to disorder, and can instead produce steadily growing order and complexity, as we see in the evolution of life on earth. God is revealed in the situations of greatest natural order and complexity, as a matter of definition, not postulating a hidden entity.

    Energy in human life takes highly complex forms that we barely understand, for example in love. If we harness the energy of the universe to serve the growth of human complexity, we are doing much the same thing that is described allegorically in the imaginative stories of Jesus Christ in the Bible, for example using faith (confidence) to move mountains, dissolving hatred through forgiveness, and seeing that good will triumph over evil.

    Where metaphysics enters the picture is not in postulating imaginary entities, but in describing how the energy of the universe can serve social and cultural goals, through love, forgiveness and grace. These ideas have been misunderstood in religious supernatural tradition, but can be reclaimed as part of a scientific understanding of spiritual energy.

    Understanding God as Energy removes the false idea of the supernatural to enable a fully natural understanding of religion.

14. Nice Article.
    Great article. The masses certainly need to get over their anthropomorphisations, and such writeups are a step in that direction.

    The only thing that can prevent this concept’s popularity is – the anthropomorphosis is an emotional anchor for the believer, and ‘energy’ will not give him any emotional support. Or solutions to his life’s problems.

    So he will like to cling to his anthropomorphisations.

    Like Carl Sagan says….

    [quote]But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying…[/quote]

15. God is unknowable and incomprehensible
    Nobody really knows GOD. It is a concept derived by our existence in a world, albeit a universe we have no idea of its beginning. There is scientific talk of the Big Bang, which is an idea that many believe. But further study of the universe indicates that there are many, many Big Bangs that finally release their energy and matter back into the universe. It did not all start at one centralized “Big Bang.” Until scientists find out how the first atom was created they are forced into the belief of energy as a first cause.

    That energy can somehow transpose itself into matter leaves one to then think that there is a conciousness that continues to evolve. First that conciousness creates matter that provides the heat and energy for life forms to eventually evolve. Not all matter consists of the same level of consciousness but when inorganic matter finally evolves into organic matter, such as grass, trees, flowers, and organic matter that becomes mobile, such as insects, fish, birds, and animals – then in the logical order of development consciousness reaches that level of thinking that causes one to question itself and the world it lives in.

    The human being is rather gifted to have developed a higher level of consciousness. A consciousness that is able to create, analyze, and question the world and oneself in relationship to others. Fortunately, mankind has been able to develop moral and ethical codes of conduct so as to increase the ability to relate and trust other human beings. This code of morality was laid down after many centuries of learning that some uniform code of ethics can only be established with an organized entity – which we refer to as religion.

    The Egyptians were the first civilization to develop a religion that brought order among their people but it gained authority by the belief in a higher entity that they could emulate and hopefully share a life of eternity with. Hence, the concept of a soul, a hereafter upon living a righteous and moral life, a Son of God (the Pharaoh/King), and finally, after the transposition of many gods they conceived the belief in one-universal God – the Maker of All there Is. But this is a result of our consciousness to try to understand the world and the universe we live in.

    There is still much for human beings to learn about how we can be proud of who we are, learn to assist and love one another, and through scientific study and reverence for the energy that initiated the entire process of the universe – we gain a truer understanding of that energy we call God.

    I have been rather brief in bringing to you a perception of my views about God. To me, people have spiritual conscousness that blends with the logical thoughts that we construct through exposure to many different ideas. Much of the input and data that come into our minds to formulate our thoughts influence how we think. We can see that some holy books, such as the Qur’an, are able to stimulate hate, bigotry, violence, and the killing of innocent people.

    It is not my intent to preach or to sway one’s beliefs but to inform people how mankind has come to conceive the gods we entertain today. There is still much more growth that needs to take place in our spiritual development. Hopefully, the few thoughts on this page will encourage you to visit the website: http://www.futureofgodamen.com

    A brief visual of my 4th book, [b]AMEN[/b], [i]the Beginning of the Creation of God [/i] is provided below. It is the book trailer for [b]AMEN[/b].
    http://youtu.be/kAf9HaN8HWA

    Thank you

16. E=mc2
    Computer programs, diatoms,snowflakes, thought,DNA ,;; all designed by an energetic algorithm , still unsolved? Maybe but we can drive on ..
    Scientists were rated as great heretics by the church, but they were truly religious men because of their faith in the orderliness of the universe.” – Albert Einstein
    “Fights between individuals, as well as governments and nations, invariably result from misunderstandings in the broadest interpretation of this term. Misunderstandings are always caused by the inability of appreciating one another’s point of view. This again is due to the ignorance of those concerned, not so much in their own, as in their mutual fields. The peril of a clash is aggravated by a more or less predominant sense of combativeness, posed by every human being. To resist this inherent fighting tendency the best way is to dispel ignorance of the doings of others by a systematic spread of general knowledge. With this object in view, it is most important to aid exchange of thought and intercourse.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

17. Thank you
    For sharing your thoughts and opinions. It is almost 4am but it is worth losing sleep to listen to and share ideas with others. Your personal interpretations are invaluable learning tools for others. It appears that many of us have formed our own personal perceptions of what we refer to as God and this can be confusing to others who believe that any perception of God must incorporate a physical entity or religious belief system. The more we all share our thoughts on this, the less confusing it will be. Hopefully this will help to dispel the ignorance of the doings of others by a systematic spread of general knowledge.

18. [i]The old appeals to racial sexual religious chauvinism and to rabid nationalist fervor are beginning not to work. A new consciousness is developing which sees the earth as a single organism and recognizes that an organism at war with itself is doomed. – Carl Sagan[/i]

    😀

19. I am moved..
    I am moved by the animated discussion. Frankly I did not expect this level of passion. I thank Acharya for her defense of me. I thank Robert Tulip for his post. I thank those that condemned me and my thought, for they inspire me to higher levels.

    Well I am not an atheist nor a deeply faithful theist.I am an ordinary man with some faith and some doubt.

    Having read the description of God in every religion gives me the impression that God is focusing only on the earth to the exclusion of other planets, other stars, their planets, black holes, comets and other astral bodies. It doesn’t seem right to me.

    But my personal experiences suggest that I received largess from God. I felt the God in my life through fortune and misfortune. I also am aware of the limitations of our physical sensory organs.

    But, anyway, I thank Acharya for publishing my article on her web site and allowing this enlightening and animated discussion.

    I will be glad if anyone wishes to contact me. Please feel free to do so.

    Murali Chemuturi

    1. You’re welcome, Murali.

       It is appropriate that you finish up your brief essay with a discussion of the sun, because solar energy has been perceived since remote antiquity as the source of all life. Hence, we find an extensive solar mythology and religion around the globe ([url]http://truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm[/url]). In this regard, there is nothing wrong or new with the concept of God as energy, specifically solar energy, perceived for the past several thousand years at least.

       Those who believe that a frank discussion of God does not belong on a freethought website appear not to realize that “freethought” has much to do with religion, traditionally perceived as a lack of belief in such. I discuss religion and God/gods all the time – that’s what I do. I have also written specifically about this particular subject, in my book [i]The Gospel According to Acharya S[/i] ([url]http://stellarhousepublishing.com/gospel.html[/url]), in which can be found an essay “What is God?” I wrote that essay about 20 years ago, so it’s not a new thing for me to discuss the concept of God. On the contrary!

       Anyway, I’m always glad to have such a lively discussion, despite the naysaying and criticisms, which needn’t be harsh.

20. Thank you.

    These are not “excuses,” which sounds condescending. They are simple philosophical musings. The term “God” is not a four-letter word that needs to be banished from polite company. On the contrary, it is quite useful, having been utilized in cultures globally for thousands of years, contemplated and discussed by some of the greatest philosophers in history, including Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, et al.

    What is this need to prevent us from discussing religion and the concept of God? I spend my life studying the world’s religions and mythologies, which most assuredly address and represent numerous concepts of God. Not all religious ideas are “ugly” – that’s a judgment call on your part.

    The rest of what you have said is a projection upon the author of this piece and those who are enjoying it. No one here is claiming prophethood or will devolve into the degenerate state you are projecting upon our simple conversation. Did the Greek thinkers I mentioned above all turn into megalomaniacal tyrants because they had philosophical discussions of religion and the concept of divinity?

    In the meantime, atheistic thought has its place, even though it appears to be quite negative and unfriendly at times. The fact is that there is also room for discussions of God and for intelligent redefining of the concept for the purpose of furthering understanding and expanding one’s perceptions.

21. You need to read this exchange again. You are attaching all kinds of negativity where it isn’t there. There’s nothing “appalling,” nothing “bizarre” about my comments; hence, my remark about “unglued.” Being “appalled” at my comments is definitely an overreaction; hence, “freaked out.”

    Initially you said Sagan was wrong – the only interpretation of that judgment is that you believe the opposite of what he said, which is that there is a personified God, whom you perceive as consciousness. Hence, my initial response was merely an observation and addendum.

    After misperceiving what I wrote, you then made a hostile and derogatory response, in which you denigrated my use of the word “acharya” – a last name held by many thousands of Indians, by the way. Are they also “self-appointed” and not “real?”

    Do you even know what the word means? It means “teacher.” I [i]teach [/i]all the time, so your continued derogation in this regard is just that. Do you actually know any of these non-“self-appointed” acharyas whom you evidently hold in high regard? They are often extremely sexist, bigoted, conceited, megalomaniacal, unenlightened and repressed. And you appear to be raising them up above me. Hence, my comment about “fantasy,” as you appear to have an unrealistic view of Indian gurus.

    Moving on now. Let us just agree to disagree that Sagan’s comment is wrong. As should have been obvious in my OP, I concur with his observations and think they are correct and important.

    1. My apologies
       Dear Acharya S:
       I assumed you were applying the term “Acharya” to yourself in the traditional Hindu sense, as in Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, Madvacharya, et al. If all you mean by it is simply “teacher,” in a secular sense, then of course you have every right to do so. My misunderstanding.
       Cheers.
       ==J
       Chaitanyamatma (God is Consciousness)
       –Shiva Sutra no. 1

22. “God” is Anthropomorphism
    Why not just “energy” without “God”? Why keep finding excuses for bringing the word “God” into it? The consciousness/conscience of humans may be accounted for by natural laws without “God.” This may be what people feel that tends to make them “lose themselves” in the Cosmos. But as soon as you say “God,” a human-type personality is implied, and then, inevitably, somebody will have a “revelation” of what “God’s” will is. Thus, religion rears its ugly head. The one who had the “revelation” will inevitably try to brain-wash others into his “vision.” He will be the leader and/or interpretor of “God,” and in the context of class society, stands a good chance of forming a priesthood which is given special authority by the ruling class to impose this “revelation” on others (maybe everyone). Brainwashing seems to be a form of hypnosis which turns people into “zombies” and is even addictive! Ruling classes love it. Once people have the habit of accepting “revelations” on blind faith, it is easy for the rulers to make themselves accepted by blind faith.

23. Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!
    Hahahahhahahahahahaahahahha!!!!!

24. Great article ,,
    Energetic responses.why offer critizism ? Why not ; all of y’all on “attack mode” need to chillax, sometimes debating is not your strong point ( been guilty before myself ) and for others remember” never argue with a fool, they’ll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience “- mark twain .
    Mr. Murali Chemuturi seems very concise and presents another facet of human ideas and experience . This should be lauded. Not ridiculed. His ideas have harmed no one but the harm is self inflicted by detractors .
    I rather enjoyed it! – peace

25. misunderstanding
    In the article above there is an apparent and quite unfortunate misunderstanding of modern physics and Big Bang theory. The findings of the modern physics and Big Bang theory suggest that the Universe came out of literally nothing. Properly understood “nothing” does not mean just empty space or some energy floating around. Nothing is the absence of anything whatsoever, even space itself, even energy itself. As such nothingness has literally no properties at all, since there isn’t anything to have any properties.

    For example Quentin smith of Western Michigan University responded that the most rational position to hold is that universe came “from nothing, by nothing, and for nothing”-this is simply the faith of an atheist. In fact I think this represents a greater leap of faith than belief in the existence of God. For it is literally worse than magic. When a magician pulls a rabbit out of a hat, at least you’ve got the magician, not to mention the hat. But something cannot come from nothing. I mean nobody sincerely believes that things, say, a horse or an Eskimo village, can just pop into being without a cause. If this is the alternative to belief in God, then unbelievers can never accuse believers of irrationality, for what could be more evidently irrational than this

    And here is why it seems extremely unlikely for Universe to happen by chance…..It is slightly technical….. but hopefully you’ll get it

    Imagine you walk on a beach and found a sandcastle made by a child. A sandcastle is made of lots of little grains of sand, arranged into a distinctive shape – a castle. Let’s say there are a million sand grains in it. We could take those million grains and instead of carefully ordering them into a castle, we could just drop them onto the ground. They would then form a pile of sand. We would be surprised to say the least if we dropped our sand grains onto the floor and they assembled themselves into a castle, but why does this not happen? What’s the difference between the pile of sand and a sandcastle? They both have the same number of sand grains and both shapes are obviously possible arrangements of the grains. Why is it overwhelmingly more likely that a shapeless pile of sand will be formed rather than a sandcastle? There is nothing at all in the laws of nature to stop the wind blowing a grain of sand off the ground and then picking up another grain from the desert and blowing it on top of the first grain building the castle bit by bit. Nothing at all, that is, other than pure chance. But it’s much more likely that the grains of sand blown of the castle are not replaced with the others from the desert and so our castle gradually disintegrates into a formless sand pile. It’s possible that the wind will build a sandcastle but the chances are akin to tossing a coin billions of times and each one coming up heads. It’s simply not going to happen. If there are a million different ways of arranging a handful of sand grains with 999,999 of the ways producing disordered sand piles but only 1 producing a beautifully ordered castle then if you keep throwing the sand grains into the air they will usually land in the form of disordered pile. From this comes the key concept in modern physics with profound consequences: …….Over time things will get more messy or disordered simply because there are more ways of being disordered then ordered. This means there is a difference between the past and the future:…… the past was more ordered and the future will be less ordered because this is the most likely way for things to play out. In other words ordered things become disordered as time ticks by….your house will deteriorate, your face will wrinkle and so on…. But where all the order in the universe comes from in the first place? In the case of a sandcastle it’s obvious – a child ….or…. I made it – but how did I get here? I am very ordered. How did earth get here? It’s very ordered too. How did the Milky Way appear if it is composed of billions of ordered worlds orbiting around billions of ordered stars? There must have been some reason why the Universe began is such a highly ordered state, such that it can gradually fall to bits. The answer is scientists don’t know why the universe began with sufficient order in the bank to allow planets, stars and galaxies to appear. It’s a mystery. There must have been a lot of order to begin with. In other words the Universe was born in a highly ordered state, and there should be a reason for that. It is unlikely to have been by chance, because by definition a highly ordered state is less likely to pop into existence than a less ordered one, a sandcastle is less likely to be formed by the desert winds than a pile of sand. Since the universe is far less ordered today than it was 13.75 billion years ago, this means that it is far more likely that our universe popped into existence recently, fully formed with planets, stars, galaxies, earth and people, than it is that the Universe popped into existence at the Big Ban in a highly ordered state

    …and so there are some good reasons to believe that God exists…there are also some good reasons to believe that God is a person…another post may be

26. I go beyond the God concept
    I consider the brain as the connecting organ to the universe and the other organs connect to the brain. We also have our conscious and subconscious multilevel minds giving me the realization there is much more to my reality. Popular Science magazine (March) article, The genius within, deals with savants and trauma launching an individual into that status too. I do contend life is continuous and articles like this seem to reenforce this concept. I have seen auroras and have friends that are very physic so there is no need to prove it false with me. Technology today has put to rest much of the witchcraft of the yesterdays, yet we still have those that think the sun goes around the earth. The leaking of other life times into the present with correct conditions such as speaking of tongues when the person doing this is far removed from the language spoken is further realization something is not yet covered in the science field on this subject. My belief system serves me well and if yours does not you can change it.

27. IS ENERGY GOD
    Q. IS GOD ENERGY
    1. If we believe God is everywhere, we have to accept God to be in
    TOILET & in sh*t also.
    2. If God is energy, we know there are +VE ENERGY, -VE ENERGY, and
    Total Energy of the UNIVERSE is ZERO.
    So it makes GOD to be ZERO.
    I think Either GOD is superior than energy or GOD does not exist.

    1. Dear Atheist, I like your jokes.

       1 — GOD is everywhere. GOD is in toilet and S**T but still GOD remains pure just like LOTUS in muddy water but still unaffected.

       2 — +ve Energy and -Ve Energy? Are you serious? Show me -ve energy example.

       Either you are a good joker OR your jokes do not exist.

    2. yes, God exists every where. God exists even in you and so can say u r a god. God exists in other human beings too. So never direspect feeling of theists!

28. This is exactly what I think. I’m so glad I found this article! Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

29. “Islam seems to specify that God exists only at one place, and that is in the Kaabah at Mecca”. – that statement regrettably is false. The Kaabah in Mecca is where many people of the Quraish Tribe of Arabs had used to pray to their pagan gods. As Mohammad’s first act after the Muslims had won the war against the pagan Arabs, he walked in and broke all of their idols to symbolize that if they believed in these gods that they had perished but that the 1 god, Allah, still exists and will never die. Today, it is a pilgrimage site and a holy city to which becomes one of the reasons why Muslims pray to the Kaabah. This does not necessarily mean God exists only in the Kaabah. Like Christianity and Judaism, Allah or God in Arabic, is Omnipresent, Omnibenevolent, and Omniscient. 🙂

30. This is the exact same conclusion I came to, and it is so wonderful to see I’m not alone in my beliefs! My view is that religion is the personification of science. In order to understand the concept of energy, we made it into something tangible; God.

31. I came to this conclusion years ago. “God and Energy” one and the same. Although, the concerns listed posing question to prayer to this God might be wrong. What would lead anyone to think that there is not a consciousness to the energy in the universe. We are a part of that energy we have freewill, emotions (for the most part), and a conscious. I certainly feel that there is design to the universe, and that it would take more than evolution to achieve the grand design. I hold the belief that God is Energy, and that all things are of God. I also feel with enough study and interpretation that all things portrayed in the Bible could have happened given that God is Energy, and all things happen through him or are of him.

32. I’m gone to convey my little brother, that he should also go to see this webpage on regular
    basis to take updated from latest news update.

33. E=mc(squared) is just a device for measuring energy; science has not truly developed any understanding of what energy IS. But I quite agree with the “God is energy” idea – list the characteristics of energy and replace that word with “God” and you’re pretty much summarizing any worthwhile religious text.

34. I’m glad I’m not the only person theorizing about this. Thank you for your contribution. Another thing I’d like to add is that because energy is neither created nor destroyed, death becomes a man-made concept, and that energy that was once animating us has exited into the world or even universe, hence an afterlife. Everything in this world is cyclical and our lives are no different. Thanks again.

35. I have studied the Torah and Talmud my entire life.
    The survival of the soul through the change called death is on the verge of being
    openly acknowledged by scientists and scholars of academic circles.
    It is wise to become the observer as the Buddha suggests.

36. I had arrived at this concept of God as the energy in the universe and it made so much sense that I have not been afraid to die since. It gave me peace and something I could really have some faith in and not the organized religions’ versions of someone who has a physical shape as we do. I believe in certain parts of the Bible as guidelines as to how we should live, but at the same time, I note that Jesus never held a service Inside a building or church. People have pointed out that he went inside a church to cast out the money-lenders and other undesirables, but never taught there. It is not inconceivable to believe that energy is a conscius entity and that our bodies hold pieces of that concious entity…as Genesis says, he created us in his image, not the body. The significance of tenrgy cannot be created or destroyed is that life continues in one form or another; we don’t die, we transition. God has always existed and God has evolved as we evolved to select us as the dominant species on this planet. But the Bibile has also been manipulated by man. Its interpretation over the centuries has been adulterated and changed. The only thing that hasn’t been changed is the Book of Revelations which has predicted a clash between the religious factions. Even so, the creation of this world as we know it was from light, the very well known form of energy and we get our life from light, the Sun. And there are many references in the Bible regarding God as the Light. There are references in the Book of Genesis that God will provide everything that Adam and Eve will ever need in the Garden of Eden. Again a reference to light that is needed for everything to survive. The clues are there that God is all around us and has no concept of time. God interchangeably matter and energy, the light. This is what I believe and it works for me.

37. if energy has no beginning no end then where does this energy come from ?

38. where does the energy come from?

    1. If you can find the source of energy, then you located God. Scientists say that energy is the result of the Big Bang when the universe was created. But there is one question begging the answer – did the energy come first and caused the Big Bang or did the Big Bang occurred first and created energy? Still no credible answer.

39. if God is water, am a drop of it. I can be in the form of OR in water, vapor, flesh, leaf or anything but still am a DROP of WATER. May be a smallest cell of God. But still am within God, just like you!

    There is no me without you. When i say Me or YOU, i mean the energy / soul within.

    Am not talking about my physical body. If i was my body, then how many times i have already dead. As per medical science guess, all our cells are changes in a time span of 7 years.

    Have your say!

40. Hi,

    I agree the fact that god is pure energy in any form.
    Change or transformation is the only way energy is immortal.
    If u take it scientifically every atom is made of energy like electrons protons and neutrons.
    But the space between them too is filled with so much energy that if fused, it will be another big bang.
    Well if every atom is energy, every living and non living thing is god, every matter or non matter is god and we too are god.
    What makes us different then anything else is transformation.
    In form of human we can act like humans in form of anything else we will act like the form.
    In this case if we really are one. Krishna said I am present in everything was right for him to say and wanted us to understand, unfold and say same.
    One form of energy is consciously different then other forms. So we can start respecting everything as god again.
    Sun, wind, soil, water, space and the rest is god/energy to bind them.
    Love anger and calmness is the only other diamention I can see.
    When a loved one dies, the person only exist in a thought. But as per doctors and scientists a thought is an electrical spark in the brain.
    So there is your life after death.
    Love gives you a heaven like feeling, anger gives hell, calmness sets u free.

    I hope this too helps you all god loving people.
    God bless
    Lobe u all

    Mukundnaath Amberkar

41. I am so glad to have Google searched “God is electromagnetic energy” and found this site. I have some of the authors books listed here in my library for my “Re-search”. I find it quite tiring to try and save the world, when it is such a challenge to save my sense of self!

    I have also found it wonderful to observe that upon quite contemplation every question I have ever pondered has been intuitively resounded in my brain! The RE-Search just grounds my ego self into proof of my intuitive self knowledge!

    Then I realize the Damage done by Power mongers in this wonderful garden by “teaching”? (It was beat into me!) of a monotheistic “God” to be feared or revered to the point of mental, physical, and spiritual enslavement of the “masses” of other beings surrounding me on this planet!

    This at some points in my present incarnation has caused anguish to the point of crossing the thin line of sanity and in-sanity! Until recently severe health issues have alerted me to further “serious” contemplations and I wish to share some of the received answers.

    You must make your “own” intuitive contact with whatever creator being you “feel” but I believe you will find that the creator of all energy is energy, so what is the fuss about? KISS

    The lack of respecting ones ability to connect by “covertly” holding sway (BY WHATEVER MEANS) over their power to connect is the Wetiko (virus) that has spread over the planet!

    So this is my rant:

    Educate Yourself and STOP Aiding and Abetting

    If you vote in this political system for another talking ” figure head ” merely doing what corporate bankers tell them to do. Then you are unwittingly ( or not ? ) Aiding and Abetting in a Criminal Enterprise!

    Let us get to the truth of the matter. We are under what is called Admiralty Law! Have been for years. All police departments, policia,enforcers of political policies, are “public corporations” listed on Dunn and Bradstreet’s website as “corporations” trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Look it up people!

    They have quotas to make, money to pay investors who purchase bonds and expect a return on their investments! When you get a ticket, you are getting an “infraction” of a “corporate statute” not breaking a law! These are not common laws they are statutes! Look it up people!

    Any nation based on corporate greed will always fail, but only after draining the people of their resources and enslaving them to push the corporate cart.

    Aiding and Abetting in a Criminal Act (Anywhere)

    If you are still teaching your children or anyone or believing in or spreading the story of Christianity or “ANY” faith, then you are unwittingly ( or not? ) Aiding and Abetting in a Criminal Enterprise and I can prove it to you if you request. So I beg you, Please Stop the Madness!

    For your children’s sake and the sake of the world! The world will not change until “we” participate by merely changing the status quo > You know in your heart that the spread of this religious “virus” has wreaked havoc in the world and is causing it’s wars and the sad end and that you can help prevent that end!

    I am a learned scholar and founder and humble reverend of The Church of B.S…..Breathe Deep and Smile Wide is my sermon and if need be I can explain the ramifications of such actions. Wise up and rise up folks and big up yourself and those in the close world around you will change and then the expanded world around you will change before your eyes.!

    I am not a ” New Age ” prophet, just a researcher and scholar of antiguities and common sense teachings. Peace be with you.

    Anyone interested in the proper books to read and authors names who are crying out in this wilderness of Wetiko ( Virus ) disease ridden society, feel free to e mail me. Good Day and Best Wishes

    1. I appreciate your patience until a “Criminal Enterprise” kind you described to evolve for blaming.

42. Please forgive me. It is early in the morning and I have problems seeing and am so used to being persecuted and I did not find my comment before I replied> please delete this embarrassing reply. I am so sorry. I feel so ashamed right now. Kinda like Chris Farley slapping my head saying GOSH, YOU STUPID ! I really do use one of my other senses which a sense of humor!

    The Magus and the Fool

43. The basic difference between God and Energy is BELIEF. At least Energy derived from some source and that source is God. There must be a creator even energy don’t change it’s form unless some force entangle and make changes. God exist where Universe ends, where energy is not visible. Where our imagination stop working where laws of physics ends, from that point god starts. Bottom line GOD is just belief nothing else it all created by human mind which not runs on laws of physics and laws of nature and no chemical composition no eternity and you can deny gods existence but cannot deny Energy other word God is very weak physically cannot do anything. But when it comes to someone’s belief God is more powerful than BIG BANG.

44. I developed this theory on my own a few years back. This article exactly describes everything that I had thought up.

45. God could be everything that is.
    Big bang, the energy that made the vast space.
    Not that God is anything more or less. Not that God holds anything together or
    is responsible for the beauty we see. But the entire energy, which we return to time and again.
    We are also of that energy.We are all a part of the same God. The bag bang is not something that we know happened twice.
    It was once and so one God. Only my small minded theory.
    But life formed over millions of years. It is always forming in different places. It is random in that way.
    Carried in the ice of comets. Carried in any matter that slips through. Seeds of life. Earth is a big garden. Planted. Any planet could, in millions of years, be another earth and earth could have miles of the surface stripped and appear like some other planet. There are so many possibilities. Yet for now. It is only a feeling that I am connected to that. I’m connected to all that came before me. I only can believe in the God that I think is everything. It is possible that there is more. There were many big bangs but we only are in this one. There was life before there was human life. Life doesn’t need to have a brain that wonders about these words. DNA/RNA hat water and stir. Peace-Shalom 🙂

46. you are 99 percent correct on god is energy . it is nice to find you are concluding originally on your own so nearest………….i shall supplement 1 percent ……i shall post more, this is first trial

47. It took me few hours to read these comments and I am intrigued how authors of these comments put ENERGY and GOD in perspective. Bottom line is ENERGY exists for those who are Atheists and GOD exists for those who thrive on BELIEF. We can not change people’s belief system. Truth is Energy and GOD coexist. It’s like calling Air as Hawwa in Hindi and as hundreds of other names in different languages. But truth remains – it is O2.
    This discussion about nomenclature of God or Energy will never end because human race is mere thousands years new where as Energy had been here for millions of years. What matters the most is how we all can use ENERGY/GOD to make this world more conscious of true nature of nature and humanity – LOVE ALL. SERVE ALL.

48. Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was a leisure account it.

    Look complicated to far brought agreeable from you!
    However, how can we keep up a correspondence?

49. Umm, Islam directly specifies that GOD is omnipresent.

50. Very impressive and you had me up to a point.

    How does one conclude that “All the energy that we use on earth comes from one single source: our sun” when we know that God created the Sun, planets, moons and stars which would require yet greater energy? Also, the sun as a source of contributing energy does not account for energy that was “breathed” (tough word choice) on Earth to create and sustain life (“let there be light”).

    I will go back and peruse the other comments.

51. If energy were non-existent would there be awareness? Are the two dependent upon each other for existence or does awareness exist only because of energy. Numbers don’t really exist–they are a human creation in order for our feeble brains to understand what is impossible to understand. The notion that there is a god like figure who gives a rats ass about a beyond microscopic piece of “puff” in the universe is absolutely and ridiculously absurd. And that “puff” being the earth–where do we as microbes (humans) think we’ll understand any of it? It’s impossible, so we create our awareness, consciousness, religious stupidities to try to comprehend–there’s no comprehending–we can’t, we don’t have the mentality to handle it!! When you think you’ve got it figured out–believe that you don’t, because–YOU DON’T

    1. You are wrong.energy cannot stand alone.it resides in everything. You cannot separate it to keep it alone. Sun posses energy and the physical world lives by it as it is been transferred into this world.can u separate the energy from the sun.energy and God are not same.can the energy in the rock feel,speak, love, hate does energy got emotions. GOD has got emotions. He is a person. He created energy. God is greater than energy that you have known.what u see as energy is a product of God. If he wants he can make the energy disappear he can vanish everything you know as energy into a black hole and the black hole into nowhere. Then where will you search for the energy. Energy is not god consciousness is not God.God is a mystery. God is a spirit.God loves you. If you seek God diligently you will find him.I’m talking about the God who created all not the all gods created by man.

       1. I will try to answer your comments to the best of my ability.

          1. Can energy exist on its own? – In the solar system, most of the energy is created by the Sun and it travels to the earth. What is carrying it from Sun to the earth through about 900 million miles of the empty space? It can exist on its own. We can only see it embedded in things and we cannot see energy on its own. God is also like that. We can see neither God nor energy. We can only perceive them.

          2. God has emotions – Do you really believe that God hates some folk and loves some folk? If all human beings are children of God, does he hate or love based on certain critera? What do you think of the parable “The Prodigal Son?

          3. Emotions – What causes emotions? Energy causes emotions. If God has emotions just like human beings and acts on impulses like you and I do, the world will not be like this.
          3. God is mystery – yes and so is energy.

          Lastly God is a name given by human beings to refer to a mysterious power they did not comprehend and still do not. And energy is also a name given by human beings of a mysterious power they did not understand and still do not comprehend. You call that mysterious power God, I call that energy.

52. I have never read a Holy Book, nor any scriptures. I don’t see God to be walking amongst us nor riding a cloud. Best of luck to the Scientist, may the force be with them! Talking about God would be like the 5 blind men and the elephant story. I cannot speak about God, but what I have come to understand is that we are being guarded, guided and driven by armies of his deputies who have earned those positions in time, and at some point in time they themselves walked the earth and graduated from here. Yes there is a element of logic to way it all operates, but most of it is beyond us, we aren’t designed to understand most of it. But if we wish to unlock knowledge there are ways and means. Best of luck.

    1. PS: GOD is the Source of all energy!

53. I completely agree with God being energy. We as humans might not be able to fully fathom the whole concept. Opinion: I think time is a sort of energy & to answer how can God answer everybody’s prayers. A being or living entity of pure energy would be able to manipulate time. Also (fact) it’s been said since the big bang the universe has expanded & still continues to do so. (Fact) an aspect of life is to grow. What’s to say off that aspect that the universe isn’t a living organism, being, entity or what? I agree mostly with the acknowledgment of if a person believes in energy or God they appear to have too great of similarities to be viewed as different. I like that.

54. God is source energy. Source energy is god. It’s just a label, an opinion and my feeling is. Nothing would exist without it. Just try and remove it from anything. This energy creates/created everything in the universe and is in everything that exists or has every existed. Not one person here can deny this or prove otherwise. This conversation is great for this contrast is really what makes us who we are, and the only reason we can even have this conversation is because of this source of everything. We don’t know what this energy is, but our trying to deny it makes us who we really are, is undeniable. Just try to disconnect yourself from it, good luck. Your ability to learn how to come into alignment with the vibration of who you really are (Source Energy) is all you ever have to do, and your longing to know what All That Is, is, will be realised. I suggest you all start now and all the longing I feel here will dissipate. Your connection to this consciousness of creation, for you are all creators of your reality, is what you are her for. All you need do is wake up and align. Wake up. So if there is a creator of everything, then the spark of everything (God, Source Energy, consciousness what ever you what to call it) is the same thing. Great conversation by the way. Have fun with this and continue the conversation, Love and Light.

55. Thanks for sharing a nice observation. And, indeed this is a revolutionary one.

Comments are closed.